17 Florida cities make U.S. News' top 250 places to live — None of them are Orlando, Miami or Tampa
The publication analyzed 859 cities in the U.S. based on five categories: quality of life, job market, value of living, net migration and desire to live in the area. They said they evaluated each category by using a methodology determined by Americans' preferences.
"While quality of life remains the top priority for many Americans – and has the heaviest weight in determining the Best Places to Live rankings – U.S. News slightly adjusted its weights to increase priority for a location's job market amid heightened economic uncertainty," Erika Giovanetti, consumer lending analyst at U.S. News & World Report, said in a May 20 statement.
You can read more about the methodology on U.S. News' website.
Florida doesn't see a spot on the list until 59 — Parkland. According to the methodology, the South Florida city saw a score of 6.4 out of 10.
The Villages saw a slot on the ranking before Orlando, Tampa or Miami. Here are all 17 Florida cities on the list:
Parkland - 59
Palm Harbor - 68
Weston - 74
Jupiter - 124
Ormond Beach - 162
Pensacola - 166
The Villages - 177
Naples - 179
Riverview - 198
Bonita Spring - 203
Pinellas Park - 126
Kendall - 219
Apopka - 221
Doral - 227
Clermont - 241
North Port - 242
St. Petersburg - 246
Only about a state away from Florida, Georgia's Johns Creek is the U.S. News and World Report's top place to live in.
"Just north of Atlanta, Johns Creek is the kind of place where tree-lined streets, a strong sense of community and a high quality of life come together to make it one of the nation's most desirable places to call home," the report says.
Johns Creek, Georgia
Carmel, Indiana
Pearland, Texas
Fishers, Indiana
Cary, North Carolina
League City, Texas
Apex, North Carolina
Leander, Texas
Rochester Hills, Michigan
Troy, Michigan
This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: U.S. News' 2025 'Best Places To Live': 17 Florida cities rank on list
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
43 minutes ago
- UPI
Federal Reserve governor Kugler resigns, creating vacancy for Trump
Adriana Kugler announced she will be leaving as Federal Reserve governor on Aug. 8. Photo by Federal Reserve Aug. 2 (UPI) -- One of the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Adriana Kugler, announced she is stepping down next week, creating an opening for President Donald Trump to fill. Her term was set to expire in January but Kugler said Friday she will depart in seven days. President Joe Biden appointed Kugler, a 55-year-old labor economist, in September 2023. Governors' terms are for 14 years, and Kugler filled an opening. "The Federal Reserve does important work to help foster a healthy economy and it has been a privilege to work towards that goal on behalf of all Americans for nearly two years," Kugler said in her resignation letter to Trump. "I am proud to have tackled this role with integrity, a strong commitment to serving the public, and with a data-driven approach strongly based on my expertise in labor markets and inflation." Kugler said she plans to return to teaching public policy at Georgetown University in the fall. She was a vice provost for faculty at Georgetown and earned her Ph.D. in economics at the University of California at Berkeley. "I am especially honored to have served during a critical time in achieving our dual mandate of bringing down prices and keeping a strong and resilient labor market," she wrote in the letter. Kugler did not vote on Wednesday when the central bank's Federal Open Market Committee kept the benchmark interest rate unchanged at a range of 4.25% to 4.5% for a fifth consecutive meeting. Two of the 11 committee members who did vote dissented, backing Trump's desire to lower rates. The 12-member committee includes the seven governors, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and four remaining 11 Reserve Bank presidents who serve one-year terms on a rotating basis. "We just found out that I have an open spot on the Federal Reserve Board. I'm very happy about that," Trump said late Friday before boarding Marine One. He later posted on Truth Social that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell "should resign, just like Adriana Kugler, a Biden Appointee, resigned. She knew he was doing the wrong thing on Interest Rates. He should resign, also!" The replacement may ultimately replace Powell, whose term ends in May, though he can remain as a governor until 2028. The president appoints each of the board members and designates one to serve as chair for four years. Trump appointed Powell during his first presidency in 2018. Biden appointed him to another term as chairman. "Trump's influence on interest rates will now be felt earlier and more strongly," Derek Tang, an economist at LHMeyer, an economic consulting firm, told The Washington Post. Contenders to lead the Fed are National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, former Fed governor Kevin Warsh and Fed governor Christopher Waller, each with distinct strengths, The Washington Post reported. Trump has said he wants Scott Bessent to remain as Treasury secretary. Trump has sought to replace Powell, calling him on Truth Social "a stubborn MORON" and "too late" on lowering interest rates. But he can only be fired "for cause," such as malfeasance, neglect of duty or inefficiency, rather than disagreeing with policies. Experts say his removal could disrupt the financial markets.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Electricity cost concerns grow amid push for more AI data centers
As tech companies race to power data centers to support artificial intelligence services, some Americans are reporting spikes in their electricity bills. The Trump administration recently released an ' AI Action Plan,' which vowed to expedite permitting for the construction of energy-intensive data centers. During the unveiling of the plan, President Trump acknowledged the growing need for power to run these centers, which are being built across the country by companies like Google, Amazon and Microsoft. New reporting by the Washington Post suggests consumers are seeing a spike in their energy bills because of these data centers. According to the report, customers in the areas serviced by PJM Interconnection have seen their electricity bills increase. In Ohio, prices are up between 10 percent and 15 percent, while in New Jersey, prices have increased 20 percent. Experts have told NewsNation that a 5-gigawatt data center could use more energy a year than many states — but they insist Big Tech growth isn't solely to blame for the recent price increases. 'Data centers are affecting electricity, but they are affecting electricity planning at this point. They are not necessarily affecting electricity bills,' said Tricia Pridemore, president of the National Association of Regulatory Commissioners (NARC). 'These large AI data centers that you keep hearing about on the news, they are in the planning and construction phase at this point.' Supply and demand are believed to be behind cost increases in the PJM territory, which has a reorganized market. They have a capacity auction in which power industries bid to supply enough electricity in the future. Right now, there is a greater demand because more supply will be needed for these data centers. At PJM's recent auction, prices went up a record 22 percent, according to Reuters. 'Within reorganized markets such as PJM, MISO, SPP, they go out and use independent power producers to generate electricity,' Pridemore said. 'Based upon the electricity that is available, those market prices drive the cost of the electricity to anyone in the system, whether it's a residential customer or a commercial or a business customer.' The NARC president added that data centers can reduce their power usage and cost by using renewable energy, and some are already tapping into solar energy.
The Hill
5 hours ago
- The Hill
There's a better approach for Trump to change Putin's calculus
On Monday, President Trump set a new 10 to 12-day ultimatum for President Vladimir Putin to enter peace talks over Ukraine or face a new tariff regime intended to halt global sales of Russian energy products. Trump is promising a 100 percent 'secondary tariff' on any country that imports Russian energy products, targeting India, China, Turkey and others. He's right to recognize that pressuring the Kremlin's main cash cow is a way to grab Putin's attention, but his approach is counterproductive and incomplete. There are two ways to change Putin's plans in Ukraine. The first is to stop Russia's ability to wage its war of choice by constraining its finances. Oil and gas sales account for about a quarter of the Kremlin's budget. The G7, including the U.S., has taken steps since the onset of the war to lower Russia's energy revenues. Last month, the Kremlin's tax proceeds from energy sales were at their lowest since January 2023; however, the Russian government still pocketed about $6 billion. This shows the tradeoff in the G7's initial goal — dent Russian revenues without fully blocking the sale of Russian oil. The G7 has attempted this balancing act because Russian oil exports still make up 7 percent of global oil supply and a full shut-in would roil energy markets across the world. Trump's new plan proposes to do exactly that. To stave off the threat of U.S. tariffs, importing countries may stop accepting Russian oil. Without Russia's 7 million barrels per day of oil exports on the market, global crude oil prices could shoot up almost 25 percent, even assuming other suppliers like OPEC have the capacity and desire to pick up half the slack. Prices at the pump in America would then climb just as tariff-induced inflation hits the economy at a time when nearly two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of inflation. The other scenario, in which some importers defy Trump's threat, is not much better. The imposed secondary tariffs would further ignite inflation in America, especially if they target Chinese imports. Another ratcheting up of tariffs timed simultaneously with increases we saw in bilateral tariffs yesterday could destabilize Wall Street's equity markets again, all while quickening price increases on Main Street. Putin understands these dynamics; that's why the secondary tariff threat won't bring him to the table. It's true that blocking the sales of Russian oil would be a massive hit to the Kremlin, but he sees this as an empty threat because the plan is costly not just to Russia but to the whole world and, in particular, America. Instead, Trump can implement a different tariff to attack Russia's revenues without causing collateral chaos. With existing authorities, the Trump administration can impose sanctions on any company or individual in the world involved in a Russian oil and gas sale. Wanting to maintain access to America's financial system, most will seek to avoid sanctions. The U.S. could permit transactions if Russia pays a shipment fee on each sale — a Russian universal tariff — to the Treasury Department. From there, the U.S. could ratchet this tariff up month by month if Putin drags his feet on negotiating. Financially squeezed over time, Putin will feel increasingly boxed in. The second way to change Putin's calculus is by fortifying Ukraine financially and militarily. Right now, the Kremlin sees global support for Ukraine waning, with citizens in America and Europe fatigued of funding a foreign war. But we don't need to rely on our own taxpayers to back the Ukrainian people. Instead, the U.S. and G7 should seize the $300 billion worth of Russian sovereign assets already frozen in our countries and commit them to supporting Ukraine's defense and reconstruction. Doing so will foil one of Putin's main strategies. Despite a standstill on the battlefield, he thinks he can bring Ukraine to its knees by destroying its economy. That will prove much harder if Ukraine can access Russia's frozen assets. In addition to financial support, Trump and Congress should commit to providing Ukraine with the military resources it needs to continue defending itself. After the 2024 election, Putin thinks he can wait out Ukraine's limited arsenal. Trump needs to flip the script and make clear that a war of attrition is not winnable for Russia. His decision to unpause previously approved military assistance was a good first step. But to force a rethink from Russia, Trump must go further. Committing to arming Ukraine with the weapons made by American workers and companies until Russia agrees to and upholds a ceasefire will do just that. After years of prolonged conflict and unnecessary death, there is a clear need to force Putin's hand. President Trump's instinct is right, but his approach is wrong. To get Russia off the battlefield and to the table, he must delineate a plan that makes negotiating Putin's best option, and that is one that hinders the Russian war machine, helps Ukraine and garners support from Americans and our allies.
